How advantageous was the policy of detente to the management of the USA's Cold War diplomacy with the USSR in the 1970's

Détente also enabled the Helsinki accords of 1975. The main factor, which was a success for America, was the agreement that the Soviets agreed to respect human rights, such as freedom of speech and a freedom of movement across Europe. This in return for the USA undermined the hold of the repressive Soviet regimes in Eastern Europe.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s, there was a lot of tension and hostility between China and the USA. This can explicitly be seen through the “hot wars” that occurred in Asia, including the Korean War, the Taiwan conflict, and most significantly Eisenhower’s threat to detonate their nuclear weapons on China if they invaded Taiwan. However, Détente allowed the two countries to ease the hostility and tension between the two countries. Détente improved Sino-American relations through Sport events, the most famous being “Ping Pong Diplomacy” where the US table tennis team was invited to China to play a friendly table tennis competition. Eventually rapprochement was created between the USA and China and indirectly this benefitted the relations between the USSR and the USA. It is questionable whether China was a superpower or not, regardless, they were still a powerful nation. As the USA has improved relations with this powerful nation the USSR became threatened, therefore a key factor in the USSR’s decision to improve their relations with the USA.  

However there is a more critical approach to détente. If détente was a genuine success, détente wouldn’t have collapsed in the first place. Firstly nuclear weapons were only attempted to be “controlled” and never fully destroyed. Confusion occurred between the two nations on the number of weapons to reduce and which weapons to limit, as the USA had superiority, if they reduced the same number as the Russians, USA’s nuclear superiority would still occur. Little was achieved during détente, in fact, armaments increased during this period and SALT 2 (the second SALT although discussed between President Jimmy Carter and Breznev) never actually took place due to the fact of personal matters between the two leaders.

The signed agreements, especially Helsinki agreements, were ignored. While the Soviet Union did not correct their human rights issues in Eastern Europe the policy of détente simply didn’t stick to its words.

However, one of the most significant failures during détente was the fact that it eventually ended, and the ending can be symbolised through the USSR’s invasion of , in April 1978. The invasion of Afghanistan was definitely considered as a significant failure of détente because it gave USA the impression that the USSR was still pursuing its expansionism ideology. The invasion of Afghanistan marked the end of Détente whilst the USA responded with the “Carter doctrine”, which was the U.S intervention in the Persian Gulf if the Soviets threatened its interests there. Additionally, President Carter responded to the USSR actions by refusing to approve SALT II, stopping all electronic exports to the Soviet Union and forbidding US athletes to participate in the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games.

Whilst there had been very obvious successes during Détente, this brief period of relaxation of tension cannot be viewed as an overall success. Initially détente started off well with the agreements of the SALT treaty and Helsinki accords. For a short time it did reduce tensions between the two nations and a threat of nuclear war, but this was very brief and weak policy. As mentioned, little was achieved in the SALT treaty, and SALT II never actually took place. It can be interpreted that the Soviets used détente for their success, using their policy to gain access to Western technology (Helsinki trade agreements) and after Détente occurred, the American’s under Reagan’s leadership, took a very hardline approach to the Soviet Union.